If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

There is a way of handling the "shouting out of questions" that has worked very effectively for the various Presidents of the United States. It is called "ignoring the question." Oh, but perhaps Lacy will be too embarrassed by the questions she might have shouted at her and even more embarrassed when she leaves them unanswered. Personally, I hope some reporters do shout out questions so that we are treated to yet another spectacle of having reasonable questions met with a strongarm response as the questioner is thrown out of the room. That would be quite the demonstration of what Lacy's character consists of.

Oh, yeah, now that would be a PERFECT ENDING to this charade in The Republic of Boulder!

Surely some reporter is going in there with the balls to do this.

Surely.

WHERE'S TRICIA! Get on the next plane to BOULDER!!

"University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"FF: WRKJB?

On the OFF CHANCE that some reporters might start reading here when they wake up from their hangovers this morning (now now, that's not a slur, I know my press corps!!!), let's start posting some fun questions for the press conference:

- Why did you let Kolar (previous investigator) go? Did he participate in the Karr investigation?

- The Carnes decision was based on one-sided evidence with no rebuttal. Why did you accept it as dispositive?

- What is your relationship with Lin Wood?

- Your office only spent $25,000 in four years on this investigation, please explain,

- From the emails you released, Lou Smit, Ollie Gray, and Michael Tracey, all private citizens, were investigating this case with Tom Bennett. Is this a proper investigative method?

- The emails constantly refer to Michael Tracey drinking alcohol while he is writing to Karr. Does this concern you in regard to his reliability?

- If the only thing that was going to make you go forward was DNA match, why didn't you do that in Thailand?

- If getting a sample from items Karr handled in Thailand was not good enough proof because of the risk of mixture, does this mean that the DNA sample found in the underwear is, at this point, also insufficient proof of the genetic identity of JonBenet's killer, because it is a mixture?

- If getting a sample from items Karr handled in Thailand was not good enough proof because of the risk of mixture, does this mean that the DNA sample found in the underwear is, at this point, also insufficient proof of the genetic identity of JonBenet's killer, because it is a mixture?

Oh, not only THAT, but according to the DNA document you have from one of the Tracey docs...the Ramseys can be eliminated as THE SOURCE OF THE DNA ONLY IF THERE IS ONE CONTRIBUTOR....

Wasn't that what it said? That's what I remember.

Does this mean THE RAMSEYS ARE NOT EXCLUDED NOW?

"University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"FF: WRKJB?

- If getting a sample from items Karr handled in Thailand was not good enough proof because of the risk of mixture, does this mean that the DNA sample found in the underwear is, at this point, also insufficient proof of the genetic identity of JonBenet's killer, because it is a mixture?

Now that you mention it WN, I am once again confused.

Has it been stated by any expert that the DNA they in fact have, truly EXCLUDES the Ramseys, or is it one of those things that we have heard so many times, it got us sucked in as a fact?

PATSY RAMSEY WROTE THE RANSOM NOTESHE WOULDN'T DO THAT FOR AN INTRUDER. PLEASE READ CHEROKEE'S ANALYSIS